ไม่สามารถเล่นวิดีโอนี้
ขออภัยในความไม่สะดวก
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 18 ส.ค. 2024
- Hello hallowed viewer. If you (like me) are an obsessed music nerd, then you have been avidly following the Ed Sheeran Vs. Marvin Gaye Lawsuit regarding "Thinking Out Loud" copying "Let's Get it On". But does any of this have any merit? It's a complicated question. But there is indeed, a definitive answer that we explore in this video. The concepts we explore in this video explaining the rationale underpinning lawsuits launched against artists like Katy Perry, Dua Lipa, Lady Gaga, Sam Smith, George Harrison and many more.
Patreon: / naetemusic
Instagram: / nae8te
Ko-Fi: ko-fi.com/naete
Soundcloud: / natepatrikk
DEBUT SINGLE Julius Caesar: linktr.ee/n8te4u
Sheet Music for Piano Reduction of the Adagio from "Gran Partita" Available here: my-store-dd0a8...
Chapters:
00:00 Intro
00:24 Blurred Lines
02:53 The Galant Schemata
06:20 The Pop/Rock Schemata
08:40 Conclusions/Solutions
Very cool explanation of law and music theory! Great job.
For years I've said the music industry needs some type of software like "Shazam", that reports how similar one piece of music is to another and what parts are covered by copyright and what parts are not.
This is the way
The music industry needs to eat shit and start letting the artists make a buck, and keep the vultur oops, i mean lawyers the F out of it.
@@crysstoll1191 That's what this software should do.
At 2:00 as soon as i heard the words "vibe" and "feel" i thought, wow, that's absurd. It's been melody, and melody only, all along until the grifter music publishers and co decide they want More...
well made video! nice one
the Sam Smith v Tom Petty example though is blatant. The key and chord progressions are identical. The only difference is the tempo and lyrics of course.
I think it's a case-by-case thing. There's many examples that have never been pursued legally (Stevie Wonder v Hall & Oates, Led Zeppelin v Styx).
Agreed. Sam smith Tom petty literally falls into the George Harrison chiffons example
I bring up; two songs that are stylistically very different but the melody is near identical
Part of me wanted Sheeran to fail so that it would completely ruin popular music. It might be a bit too cynical but sometimes I feel like it deserves to be ruined.
I feel that as a culture we have completely forgotten that music can have a place outside of it being a commodity. We only talk about record sales, net worths, lawsuits for money, all major music events are nothing more than businesses. So should we be really surprised that this kind of stuff happens? Aren’t we being a bit incredulous about the very reality we are living in?
In the society I live in there has been a tremendous decline in appreciation of arts. Just 50 years ago society invested tons into art that didn’t necessarily fill a commercial purpose. Now the mainstream thought about arts is “if you can’t make money with it then it is not worth it”. So many art schools have closed, so many venues that offered a rich and wide range of art have had to cater to the banal and popular in order to survive commercially. And this is self reinforcing in the sense that whenever there is money made available for something without a commercial interest they give it to commercial artists because they are the only ones in the spotlight.
It sounds very snobbish to poo poo popular music, it is typically elitist musician/anti-capitalist. But I think there is really something there. It is pretty much undeniable when some hyper generic popular artist gets sued for millions because his song sounded somewhat similar to another hyper generic popular artist.
Art is commonly associated with culture. Your cultural identity can be expressed through the music that you place or listen to. But there is another way to think about it. Art not as an outward expression of culture but art as an ‘enforcer’ of culture. Art instructs people on what values one should desire, what truth is, how and what to think, creates the parameters of our perception. If so, what does this current climate of popular music enforce on people? What values does it make us desire? In what framework should we view the world? It obviously leads to commercialism, to desire money, to view reality as opportunities for commercial exploitation, to think only in terms of commodities.
And if that is true then there is absolutely zero chance that this was the last of the crazy lawsuits, in fact it will only get worse until it completely breaks down or spirals into endless regression. Historically the trend seems pretty steadily. Companies are making billions from IP, so why wouldn’t they always try to find new ways to get more money out of it? Why wouldn’t Disney always try to extend the length of copyright? They got a lot more to lose than anybody else and they have the capital for it.
Why wouldn’t publishing companies who own billions, if not trillions, in IP use that wealth to not only protect their position of power but extend it? Who is going to stop them? A bunch of broke “unsuccessful” artists and dusty boring academics?
I understand your frustration with homogeneity of SOME pop music. But trust me, you should be very happy this lawsuit failed as if it had succeeded it would've set a horrible precedent for making any kind of music at all.
What an abysmal take
@@AlbertGenower Any points in specific?
I don't know if Sheeran ripped off Gaye or not, and the concept of ripping off based on 'feel' alone is pretty absurd, but an additional missing context is here is that Sheeran probably got into this because he has a reputation for ripping off people in the past in ways that are more sus. Predominately he is one of many rich entitled dare I say 'club' musicians who have ripped off small 'unknown' artists. Both he and Dua Lipa were accused of ripping off small unknown artists in the last few years but were able to use their rpivelged legion of lawyers to get off from this. An associate of Sheeran even veiled admitted that they ripped off parts of 'Shape Of You' from a Sami Switch song before deleting the FAcebook comment in question (one reason I ALWAYS screenshot everything now). Dua Lipa similarly did the same to an unknown band from Florida, forget the name. This is something that big Illum*n*ti artists do to 'unknowns' all the time. I can prove with evidence that Eric Andre ripped off my 2017 comedy skit 'Grab Em By The Flat Earth' for instance (I map it out in an video available on Odys*e and other sites called 'Controlled Op Copycats 1'). Additionally you gaslight people into thinking that unknown non club artists automatically 'have no merit' in cases such as these by insinuating the Soundcloud guy is just some 'unknown hack'. The fact of the matter is NO ONE gets ahead in the music industry without making the 'soul contract'. Why is it that horrible mumble rap artists and mediocre singers such as Sheeran are at the top of Top 40 charts whereas a local post prog jazz rock band from Pittsburgh or something isn't? One important difference: the mumble rap hack is in the club, the 'random' prog jazz rock band isn't. Hell even by the nature of your 'Lost' series that looks at overlooked artists, this should be obvious to you, and yet you're pandering to Sheeran on this particular issue. You have to know about the lawsuit Sheeran had between him and Sami Switch in which the evidence is more damning, or the Dua Lipa lawsuit. And anyway Sheeran sucks too. You wanna talk about hacks lol. Sheeran hasn't made an original or compelling peice of music his entire career. I've found 'random Soundcloud bands' that are ten times more interesting than Ed Sheeran. While I agree the concept of ripping off a vibe is absurd, its the idea that Sheeran is somehow an innocent here that I object to given the Sami Switch lawsuit.
mr beast
I took your advice 😭😭😭
This is a very important thing, and hope the authorities do not get crazy with AI and lose the notion about good sense. This happens because of clueless composers! For example, if i hear the Swann Lake on EDM when i am just going to buy bread, it gives me heart attack.
And well said about the schemes. Those things are natural to music, i also mentioned it here th-cam.com/video/LHVqpOc9-C8/w-d-xo.html . But for me the concept of gesture is more important than scheme, scheme is what Gejedingen and Co. likes because makes their academic teaching easier and more delimited face to function theory and other things. It is at same good a good thing to learn , but I suspect that it can be the secret for annoying improvisation if the student starts focusing on this before other things . In Austria we learned his way before this book, figured bass is an obvious thing, and the schemes are learned by ear anyway. It is like rhetoric figures: you will do them anyway! If you learned some pieces of the style. So why bother too much...? idk . The importance of his book is that it saved american music theory from complete abstract non-sense. This is why people react to Gjendingen as he were some kind of savior... In some sense he is. BUt then some guys start to become pieces of museum again and misunderstand the perspectives of progressive music theory, this is also true.
Nicely done. Sincerely, an Adam Neely fan.